[br]johara1 said:
Jim, [br]
Granted, there are practical considerations that make direct comparisons difficult. BR shoots short strings, fired rapidly, from a concrete bench. F-Class shoots longer strings, fired at a longer spacing, from prone, in more varied wind conditions. That said: anecdotal feedback from target pullers is that my absolute vertical is much less than X ring. Practical application of that, given the above constraints, is more difficult. I think it fair to say that equipment is little different except that our rifles are five pounds heavier. [br]
I went through a period of sorting by bearing surface and did not find significant improvement. Pursuant to this conversation, I just measured 100 Berger 230 Hybrids (lot #5192) using two Sinclair comparators. The total variance was .007". Berger lists the bearing surface as .495". That means ~1.4% bearing length variance. To the extent that bearing surface influences B.C., and I know that it does but not quantifiably, how much does 1.4% variance change the B.C.? If, as thumper4fun offered as example, the variance was .030", there might be verifiable improvement. I never saw 1/3 of that when sorting Bergers and, finally, stopped doing it with no noticeable degradation. [br]
My routine is to trim and point, weigh each bullet to eliminate any more than .5 grain high or low, keep an eye open for minor defects like nose folds, etc., and sort for seating depth using Bob Green's tool. My current .300 WSM load averages 9 fps ES @2865 and seems to hold excellent vertical at 1000. I don't want to be misunderstood here. If you find something that verifiably works for you, do it. My testing was methodical and careful and did not show a benefit to sorting bearing surface. I assume that your testing and that of thumper4fun was the same and showed a benefit, so you continue to do it. It is all anecdotal and should be tested by each shooter aspiring to improve.
I guess its just in my nature, but I sure do enjoy this sport!
